We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
In the 1960s, Algeria and Cuba became global archetypes of revolution. Opposed to the international system, militant, and loosely allied with the Soviet Union, the two countries challenged Western security in both the Caribbean and North Africa. This similarity created an important if superficial solidarity that emphasized regional support for armed revolutionary movements as a way of safeguarding their states from US intervention. Nevertheless, the Cuban and Algerian positions in Third World affairs started to diverge in the late-1960s as the two countries politico-economic positions changed and they adopted distinct strategies for advancing a radical Third World agenda. Algeria became increasingly invested in using established structures and norms to adjust the international order. In contrast, Cuba championed a global armed militancy, sometimes targeting Third World governments associated with such groups as the G-77 but viewed as insufficiently dedicated to Tricontinental goals. This divergence in international perspectives and tactics reveals the complexity of the Tricontinental ideology, as well as the evolution of radical diplomacy as revolutionary states matured.
One of the more prominent themes to emerge from this roundtable is the desire to integrate the history of the modern Middle East with broader trends in international history, particularly with regard to the recent emphasis on “decentralizing” and “globalizing” the Cold War narrative. My own research interests are consistent with this approach, as one of the central concerns of my current project is to show how Algeria's revolutionary nationalists defied the regional categories imposed on them from the outside by pursuing overlapping diplomatic initiatives under the rubrics of Maghribi unity, African unity, Arab unity, Afro-Asianism, and Third Worldism. After independence in 1962, the Algerian foreign ministry's main geographical divisions differed significantly from those used by the U.S. State Department—and most history departments’ hiring committees—by dividing the world into “the West,” “the Socialist Countries,” “the Arab World,” “Africa,” and “Latin America/Asia.” These categories were the product of both practical considerations and ideological/identity politics on the part of Algeria's new leaders, and to my mind suggest that the “Middle East” may itself be a particularly arbitrary and misleading geographical framework, even in comparison to other parts of the developing world where European imperialism exerted a heavy cartographical influence.
Florida is the fourth largest state in the United States of America. In 2004, 218,045 live babies were born in Florida, accounting for approximately 1744 new cases of congenital heart disease. We review the initial experience of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database with a regional outcomes report, namely the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Florida Regional Report.
Eight centres in Florida provide services for congenital cardiac surgery. The Children’s Medical Services of Florida provide a framework for quality improvement collaboration between centres. All congenital cardiac surgical centres in Florida have voluntarily agreed to submit data to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and Duke Clinical Research Institute prepared a Florida Regional Report to allow detailed regional analysis of outcomes for congenital cardiac surgery.
The report of 2007 from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database includes details of 61,014 operations performed during the 4 year data harvest window, which extended from 2003 through 2006. Of these operations, 6,385 (10.5%) were performed in Florida. Discharge mortality in the data from Florida overall, and from each Florida site, with 95% confidence intervals, is not different from cumulative data from the entire Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database, both for all patients and for patients stratified by complexity.
A regional consortium of congenital heart surgery centres in Florida under the framework of the Children’s Medical Services has allowed for inter-institutional collaboration with the goal of quality improvement. This experience demonstrates, first, that the database maintained by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons can provide the framework for regional analysis of outcomes, and second, that voluntary regional collaborative efforts permit the pooling of data for such analysis.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.